The technique of the photoplay ([c1913])

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

SELF-CRITICISM 141 That is the first point to be looked to. Suppose that instead of this arrangement we had excluded from the original draft those scenes showing Peitro in the kitchen. This would have been a natural move, holding back the discovery of Peitro's oc- cupation until scene thirty-five, that the audience might be sur- prised. This would be a perfectly natural move, most especially to the beginner, but let's think it over. If we had not shown Peitro in the kitchen, we would have come upon development number seven in scene sixteen with Peitro a total stranger to the spectator. Here comes a new character. Who is he? We do not know. We not only wonder who he is, and lose interest in the action because we are busy wondering, but we lose completely the comedy of idea. Knowing that Peitro is the chef in the hotel in which Auntie is a guest, the meeting at once becomes big with pos- sibilities. Auntie's encounter with a distinguished stranger is not one-tenth as amusing as the idea of Auntie discreetly flirting with the chef of the hotel. N'ote well how the author, realizing the need for showing that Peitro does not fill a menial capacity, discloses that Peitro is the overlord of the kitchen. Peitro is the czar of his domain and in each of the kitchen scenes this fact is emphasized. We feel a greater interest in the chef than in the dishwasher and it is because he is a chef and not a dishwasher that he is a possibility. So this schedule of incident will either show us that the plot is properly developed or that it lacks certain treatment. In this bare assemblage of facts there is lacking the color of the action and we can study the skeleton of the idea and make certain that the bones are properly articulated. We can see whether or not each new development comes into the story in its proper place or not. If we find a fact misplaced it is an easy matter to change the schedule. Suppose that we had, as the first development, that Peitro was a real Count, the scene perhaps showing him receiving the notification. A glance at the schedule would have shown that the fact that he really was a count was out of place. We cannot get the surprise for the climax from the fact that he is a chef. We can get it from the fact that he really is a count. That fact might not show from merely reading the story, but once trained to develop plots, the schedule will show almost at a glance, and certainly with a little study, whether or not the factors are correctly placed. Once the argument is properly arranged, take the scenes each in its turn. The first two scenes are devoted to introducing the characters. Here is the chef of the hotel, here are the proprietor and his son and here are Aunt Amanda and Ethel, her niece,